Journalism, Law, Nursing, Business Administration, Radiation Technology and so on From an institutional and organizational perspective, the advent of NORPAC was achieved on the basis of maximizing efficiency. A relatively small incremental fund was proffered by the Department of Advanced Education to cover modest additional costs. In other ways, too, NORPAC was ahead of its time. Across Canada and elsewhere programs outside of teacher education now boast of offering “Co-op” programs, in engineering for example, and even in Arts & Science. Co-op programs provide an opportunity for students to gain ‘real world’ experience in the workplace, and thus put theory into practice by applying what they have learned in the context of a workplace. They are called “co-op” simply because they involve cooperation between the university and an employer. This was the NORPAC vision. In keeping with this goal, NORPAC students were assigned to a local employer in a northern community and a special course focussed on the integration of their academic and work experience was included in their program. In order to ensure the partnership worked effectively, every year the students and their supervising employer were brought together for a two-day seminar designed to promote better communication, collaboration and mutual understanding. Students were placed in a variety of workplace settings—from the local Coop store, to the Band Office, to a local newspaper office, to a government agency, and so on. Typically, NORPAC students took courses for two weeks a month in La Ronge, at the NORTEP Campus, and then spent two weeks a month in their workplace setting. They followed this pattern for three semesters a year: Fall, Winter, and Spring. By following the three-semester model, students were able to earn a full year of credit (30 cr. hrs.), even though they also spent a significant amount of time in a workplace setting. Eventually, the practicum component had to be discontinued. In a cost-savings measure, the NORTEP program itself ceased being ‘field-based’ and assumed a more traditional format, with students based at the campus in La Ronge rather than travelling back and forth from La Ronge to their home communities. Originally, these travelling costs were assumed by the program, to enable students to take their university studies without relocation from their primary place of residence. Over time, however, it became necessary to draw on this travelling fund simply to maintain core elements of both the NORTEP and the NORPAC programs. By the same token, instead of travelling back and forth from home to La Ronge, students were now based in La Ronge and the provision of adequate student housing became a significant issue. Once the campus-based program in La Ronge became the norm, it became impractical to identify sufficient employer sites to sustain the NORPAC practica. La Ronge simply did not have a sufficient cadre of employers to offer the range of practicum placements that would be demanded by NORPAC. With two years of programming on the go, if we assume even twelve or fifteen students per year (plus more than one year group!)—it is easy to appreciate that finding twenty to thirty suitable employment placements was simply impossible. Nevertheless, the spirit of NORPAC persisted, and the opportunity to pursue several years of study in La Ronge at the NORTEP campus continued to thrive. Over time, it was even possible for students in certain areas of study, such as Native studies, to undertake a third year and thus, complete a full degree. If necessary, depending on the career direction they
3
